L X Luo1, Z Y Yu2, J W Huang2, H Wu2. 1. Department of Liver Surgery & Liver Transplantation Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China. Electronic address: luolixi1987@gmail.com. 2. Department of Liver Surgery & Liver Transplantation Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Opinions on the suitability of repeat hepatectomy for patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) vary among studies. We conducted a meta-analysis to establish the criteria for selecting the best candidates for a second hepatectomy. METHODS: Database and manual searches were performed to identify comparative or prognostic studies published up to October 2013. Outcomes of interest included disease characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term survival after initial and second hepatectomies for patients with CRLM. Study quality was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and a modified Hayden's score. RESULTS: A total of 7226 patients from 27 studies were included. Recurrent CRLMs after initial hepatectomy were more likely to be solitary (RR = 0.86, P = 0.045), unilobar (RR = 0.60, P < 0.001), and smaller (WMD = -0.66, P < 0.001). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were comparable between initial and second hepatectomies (RR = 1.10, P = 0.191; RR = 0.78, P = 0.678, respectively). In high-quality studies, patients showed better survival after a second hepatectomy than those after a single hepatectomy (HR = 0.68, P = 0.022). Patients meeting the following six predictors survived longer after second hepatectomy: disease-free survival after initial hepatectomy >1 y (P = 0.034); solitary CRLM at second hepatectomy (P < 0.001); unilobar CRLM at second hepatectomy (P = 0.009); maximal size of CRLM at second hepatectomy ≤ 5 cm (P = 0.035); lack of extrahepatic metastases at second hepatectomy (P < 0.001); and R0 resection at second hepatectomy (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Second hepatectomy is a safe and feasible procedure for patients with recurrent CRLM. In fact, in well-selected patients it improves overall survival. The established criteria can help clinicians to select the best candidates for second hepatectomy and to achieve better long-term outcomes after resection.
BACKGROUND: Opinions on the suitability of repeat hepatectomy for patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) vary among studies. We conducted a meta-analysis to establish the criteria for selecting the best candidates for a second hepatectomy. METHODS: Database and manual searches were performed to identify comparative or prognostic studies published up to October 2013. Outcomes of interest included disease characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term survival after initial and second hepatectomies for patients with CRLM. Study quality was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and a modified Hayden's score. RESULTS: A total of 7226 patients from 27 studies were included. Recurrent CRLMs after initial hepatectomy were more likely to be solitary (RR = 0.86, P = 0.045), unilobar (RR = 0.60, P < 0.001), and smaller (WMD = -0.66, P < 0.001). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were comparable between initial and second hepatectomies (RR = 1.10, P = 0.191; RR = 0.78, P = 0.678, respectively). In high-quality studies, patients showed better survival after a second hepatectomy than those after a single hepatectomy (HR = 0.68, P = 0.022). Patients meeting the following six predictors survived longer after second hepatectomy: disease-free survival after initial hepatectomy >1 y (P = 0.034); solitary CRLM at second hepatectomy (P < 0.001); unilobar CRLM at second hepatectomy (P = 0.009); maximal size of CRLM at second hepatectomy ≤ 5 cm (P = 0.035); lack of extrahepatic metastases at second hepatectomy (P < 0.001); and R0 resection at second hepatectomy (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Second hepatectomy is a safe and feasible procedure for patients with recurrent CRLM. In fact, in well-selected patients it improves overall survival. The established criteria can help clinicians to select the best candidates for second hepatectomy and to achieve better long-term outcomes after resection.
Authors: Julie Hallet; Antonio Sa Cunha; Daniel Cherqui; Brice Gayet; Diane Goéré; Philippe Bachellier; Alexis Laurent; David Fuks; Francis Navarro; Patrick Pessaux Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: F Navarro-Freire; P Navarro-Sánchez; N García-Agua; B Pérez-Cabrera; A Palomeque-Jiménez; J A Jiménez-Rios; P A García-López; A J García-Ruiz Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Jason W Denbo; Suguru Yamashita; Guillaume Passot; Michael Egger; Yun S Chun; Scott E Kopetz; Dipen Maru; Kristoffer Watten Brudvik; Steven H Wei; Claudius Conrad; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Thomas A Aloia Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Siân A Pugh; Megan Bowers; Alexandre Ball; Stephen Falk; Meg Finch-Jones; Juan W Valle; Derek A O'Reilly; Ajith K Siriwardena; Joanne Hornbuckle; Myrddin Rees; Charlotte Rees; Tim Iveson; Tamas Hickish; Tom Maishman; Louise Stanton; Elizabeth Dixon; Andrea Corkhill; Mike Radford; O James Garden; David Cunningham; Tim S Maughan; John A Bridgewater; John N Primrose Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Christopher P Neal; Gael R Nana; Michael Jones; Vaux Cairns; Wee Ngu; John Isherwood; Ashley R Dennison; Giuseppe Garcea Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 4.452